Seiko Superior (70’s quartz) 4883 models - differences?

[kentkurt]

Hi,

I’m bewildered by the info out there in the various versions of the 4884 Superior that Seiko released.
I’ve come across the references 4883-8000, 8001 & 8100. I’ve even seen a 8010.
Does anyone here take a special interest in these and wouldn’t mind explaining the differences here?
I believe many of them came in both steel and cap or plated gold versions with the same case number. I also read that there were two versions of the 4883 caliber, the a and the b version. 
Was there a difference in case and bracelet design?

thanks! 

[rossr]

I have the 4883-8001 from January 1977.  I think that it is a better (slightly larger) size than the 9943-type pieces that were to follow. I can't help you with model variances. Gerald has written a great article on his The Grand Seiko Guy page that you should check out.

[cobrajet25]

Generally speaking, many of the differences in model numbers on the 48-series watches relate to when they were made.

Sometime around 1976, Seiko went from the 48xxA to the 48xxB.  Depending on the caliber the B version wasn't always quite as accurate as the A version, but it did use less power.  This meant a change in battery size from an SR43 (large battery) to an SR936 (small battery) and an increase in battery life.  In order to keep things straight in terms of case parts, Seiko simply switched a "0" in the model numbers for watches using the 48xxA to a "1" in the model numbers for watches using the 48xxB.

As an example, a 4843-8040 and a 4843-8041 are the same watch, but the former will be pre-1976 and have a 4843A while the latter will be post-1976 and have a 4843B.  I'd bet a 4883-8000 and a 4883-8100 are 95% the same, but there are enough differences to warrant separate model numbers between the two.  Without even reading the model numbers I can tell whether a 48xx watch has an A movement or a B movement just by the size of the battery hatch cover.

As a rule, things like bracelets and crystals remained interchangeable, but some things like battery hatches and gaskets are different.

[HiBeat]

Awesome cobrajet25

[gerald]

Jun 4, 2021 0:05:49 GMT -8 cobrajet25 said:

Generally speaking, many of the differences in model numbers on the 48-series watches relate to when they were made.

Sometime around 1976, Seiko went from the 48xxA to the 48xxB.  Depending on the caliber the B version wasn't always quite as accurate as the A version, but it did use less power.  This meant a change in battery size from an SR43 (large battery) to an SR936 (small battery) and an increase in battery life.  In order to keep things straight in terms of case parts, Seiko simply switched a "0" in the model numbers for watches using the 48xxA to a "1" in the model numbers for watches using the 48xxB.

As an example, a 4843-8040 and a 4843-8041 are the same watch, but the former will be pre-1976 and have a 4843A while the latter will be post-1976 and have a 4843B.  I'd bet a 4883-8000 and a 4883-8100 are 95% the same, but there are enough differences to warrant separate model numbers between the two.  Without even reading the model numbers I can tell whether a 48xx watch has an A movement or a B movement just by the size of the battery hatch cover.

As a rule, things like bracelets and crystals remained interchangeable, but some things like battery hatches and gaskets are different.

OK so we need to address some issues in the above...

I could be wrong on this specific point, but I have always been of the belief that it was actually an improvement in battery energy storage density that was behind this change, and not an improvement in power consumption of the movement. The ability to produce smaller batteries with the same energy capacity as those that went before them meant that profile of the watches using them could be reduced.

Again - to stress - that much is conjecture on my part and I've not looked into it in depth. The following is fact -

The 48xxB movements were introduced in watches produced from June 1977, and whilst it is true to say the case reference numbers were updated, it is not correct to state that a 4843-8040 has an A movement, and a 4843-8041 has a B movement. They are both A movements.

The B movement replacement for the 4843-8041 was the 4843-8110 (both for the SS and CG variants).

With regards to Seiko Grand Quartz, I detail the complete history of every reference in an article that you can find here -

thegrandseikoguy.com/2020/04/07/a-history-of-grand-seiko-1975-to-1988/

The article includes details on all references with B movements that directly replaced ones with A movements (see the section on the 1977 volume 2 catalogue). 

More on the wider range of references (including Superiors and King Quartz) that were affected by this update can be found here -

thegrandseikoguy.com/2020/04/13/update-of-48xx-series-movements/

Suffice to say, where the Superior is concerned, 4883-8000 is the A movement, 4883-8100 is the B movement.

As per the technical update from the time, the move to the B movements introduced neither functional nor performance changes.

With regards to the OP's question on 4883 Superior variants, I am aware only of the following (in brackets are the catalogue references)-

4883-8110 (HNL020) - 18K white gold case on 18K white gold bracelet, 1.5M Yen. Only appears in the 1976 Cret D'Or catalogue.
4883-8110 (HNL824) - 18K yellow gold case on 18K yellow gold bracelet, 1.4M Yen. Only appears in the 1976 Cret D'Or catalogue.
4883-8000 (QNL010) - HSS case on XBA280 bracelet, 180,000 Yen. Appears in 1976 V1 and 1977 V1 catalogues.
4883-8000 (QNL804) - HGP case on leather strap, 180,000 Yen. Appears only in 1977 V1 catalogue.
4883-8100 (QNL020) - Replaced QNL010. HSS case on XBB110 bracelet, 180,000 Yen. Appears in 1977 V2 and 1978 V1 catalogues.
4883-8100 (QNL824) - Replaced QNL804. HGP case on leather strap, 180,000 Yen. Appears in 1977 V2, 1978 V1, and 1978 V2 catalogues.

I am not aware of the existence of a 4883-8010 as mentioned in the first post. If anyone has a photograph of this reference, I'd be very intrigued to see it, although I suspect that maybe there is some confusion with the 9983 series here, which did exist in -8000 and -8010 cases.

(General note - I've only detailed watches whose case numbers end in '0'. You do see examples of some references also ending with a '1', but to date I have never come across anyone who can explain what - if any - difference there is between the two. Both of my 4843-804x are -8041's. I know that the -8040 does exist, but keep forgetting to buy an example to check in detail. I will resume the hunt following this reminder!)

Kind regards,


Gerald.

[Senpai]

I have both the 4842/3-8041 and 4840-8110 and just looking at the cases, the former is larger, thicker and with 19mm lugs. The later 8110 has a slimmer profile and 18mm lugs. Lower crystal also, but Im not certain what a original should look like. The bracelets for the date and day/date models also changed, and I think there might be two clasps for the later 8110.

”Vigges66” on instagram has made a comparision of the Superior 4883-8001 and 4883-8100 and together with the battery guide seems to confirm what Gerald stated above, battery life remains the same, 2 years.

[rossr]

My 4883-8001 has a SGP case - not the best plating for a case.

[cobrajet25]

Jun 4, 2021 20:41:23 GMT -8 gerald said:

Jun 4, 2021 0:05:49 GMT -8 cobrajet25 said:

Generally speaking, many of the differences in model numbers on the 48-series watches relate to when they were made.

Sometime around 1976, Seiko went from the 48xxA to the 48xxB.  Depending on the caliber the B version wasn't always quite as accurate as the A version, but it did use less power.  This meant a change in battery size from an SR43 (large battery) to an SR936 (small battery) and an increase in battery life.  In order to keep things straight in terms of case parts, Seiko simply switched a "0" in the model numbers for watches using the 48xxA to a "1" in the model numbers for watches using the 48xxB.

As an example, a 4843-8040 and a 4843-8041 are the same watch, but the former will be pre-1976 and have a 4843A while the latter will be post-1976 and have a 4843B.  I'd bet a 4883-8000 and a 4883-8100 are 95% the same, but there are enough differences to warrant separate model numbers between the two.  Without even reading the model numbers I can tell whether a 48xx watch has an A movement or a B movement just by the size of the battery hatch cover.

As a rule, things like bracelets and crystals remained interchangeable, but some things like battery hatches and gaskets are different.

OK so we need to address some issues in the above...

I could be wrong on this specific point, but I have always been of the belief that it was actually an improvement in battery energy storage density that was behind this change, and not an improvement in power consumption of the movement. The ability to produce smaller batteries with the same energy capacity as those that went before them meant that profile of the watches using them could be reduced.

Again - to stress - that much is conjecture on my part and I've not looked into it in depth. The following is fact -

The 48xxB movements were introduced in watches produced from June 1977, and whilst it is true to say the case reference numbers were updated, it is not correct to state that a 4843-8040 has an A movement, and a 4843-8041 has a B movement. They are both A movements.

The B movement replacement for the 4843-8041 was the 4843-8110 (both for the SS and CG variants).

With regards to Seiko Grand Quartz, I detail the complete history of every reference in an article that you can find here -

thegrandseikoguy.com/2020/04/07/a-history-of-grand-seiko-1975-to-1988/

The article includes details on all references with B movements that directly replaced ones with A movements (see the section on the 1977 volume 2 catalogue). 

More on the wider range of references (including Superiors and King Quartz) that were affected by this update can be found here -

thegrandseikoguy.com/2020/04/13/update-of-48xx-series-movements/

Suffice to say, where the Superior is concerned, 4883-8000 is the A movement, 4883-8100 is the B movement.

As per the technical update from the time, the move to the B movements introduced neither functional nor performance changes.

With regards to the OP's question on 4883 Superior variants, I am aware only of the following (in brackets are the catalogue references)-

4883-8110 (HNL020) - 18K white gold case on 18K white gold bracelet, 1.5M Yen. Only appears in the 1976 Cret D'Or catalogue.
4883-8110 (HNL824) - 18K yellow gold case on 18K yellow gold bracelet, 1.4M Yen. Only appears in the 1976 Cret D'Or catalogue.
4883-8000 (QNL010) - HSS case on XBA280 bracelet, 180,000 Yen. Appears in 1976 V1 and 1977 V1 catalogues.
4883-8000 (QNL804) - HGP case on leather strap, 180,000 Yen. Appears only in 1977 V1 catalogue.
4883-8100 (QNL020) - Replaced QNL010. HSS case on XBB110 bracelet, 180,000 Yen. Appears in 1977 V2 and 1978 V1 catalogues.
4883-8100 (QNL824) - Replaced QNL804. HGP case on leather strap, 180,000 Yen. Appears in 1977 V2, 1978 V1, and 1978 V2 catalogues.

I am not aware of the existence of a 4883-8010 as mentioned in the first post. If anyone has a photograph of this reference, I'd be very intrigued to see it, although I suspect that maybe there is some confusion with the 9983 series here, which did exist in -8000 and -8010 cases.

(General note - I've only detailed watches whose case numbers end in '0'. You do see examples of some references also ending with a '1', but to date I have never come across anyone who can explain what - if any - difference there is between the two. Both of my 4843-804x are -8041's. I know that the -8040 does exist, but keep forgetting to buy an example to check in detail. I will resume the hunt following this reminder!)

Kind regards,


Gerald.

Great stuff, Gerald!  I am happy to defer to your expertise!

I knew the model numbers changed based on which movement was in the watch, but I was wrong about exactly what numbers changed for which models.  The 4843-8041 sitting two feet away from me on my nightstand has a...4843A.   It dates to November, 1976.

I may have to take slight issue with your statement that performance was not affected between the A variants and B variants.  I got this information from a Seiko battery cross-reference chart dated March, 2013.  It seems to have been put out by Seiko and not a third party.

The first column is current consumption, and there are some significant differences between the A and B movements.  I presumed the 48xx movement was updated to provide for more efficient battery usage, a smaller battery, perhaps a longer battery life, and a smaller case thickness.  These movements are power hogs compared to nearly everything else in this chart!

The sixth column is rated accuracy in seconds per month.  There are some differences here with regard to the A versus B movements as well.  The last column is battery life in years.  The contemporary technical descriptions noting the apparent lack of differences between the A and B that you have are probably correct, but this information is, well...interesting.  It is what I was referencing when I made my post.

I actually do have a cap gold 4843-8040.  It was a very nicely priced BIN on YJ about three or four years ago.  I only bought it because it was nearly unused, relatively inexpensive, and came with it's original 16mm (or 15mm?) 'GQ' signed buckle.  I had to order a 19mm Seiko leather strap that tapers down like the original did from Japan as well as I couldn't seem to find one anywhere else.  This one is a close match to what it would have come on new.  Odd that Seiko would literally change nothing about this watch...including where it was sold...and change the model number from -8040 to -8041 sometime in '76?  The -8040s all seem to have late 1975 or early 1976 SNs.

This one dates to December, 1975.

[gerald]

Jun 5, 2021 0:58:14 GMT -8 cobrajet25 said:

Jun 4, 2021 20:41:23 GMT -8 gerald said:

I may have to take slight issue with your statement that performance was not affected between the A variants and B variants.  I got this information from a Seiko battery cross-reference chart dated March, 2013.  It seems to have been put out by Seiko and not a third party.

The first column is current consumption, and there are some significant differences between the A and B movements.  I presumed the 48xx movement was updated to provide for more efficient battery usage, a smaller battery, perhaps a longer battery life, and a smaller case thickness.  These movements are power hogs compared to nearly everything else in this chart!

The sixth column is rated accuracy in seconds per month.  There are some differences here with regard to the A versus B movements as well.  The last column is battery life in years.  The contemporary technical descriptions noting the apparent lack of differences between the A and B that you have are probably correct, but this information is, well...interesting.  It is what I was referencing when I made my post.

Hi -

Yes that is indeed interesting information.

Regarding the rationale for the movement change, as I stated, it was just conjecture on my behalf that slimmer batteries with the same energy capacity became available which led to the watches being able to be reduced in size.

I am however always suspicious of tables such as this one - regardless the fact that they are "official" from Seiko - that are put together decades after the fact.

Contemporary to the change taking place, Seiko stated in the technical update to their dealers "There are no other changes in function or performance". I would take a statement made in June 1977 relating to a production change that took place in June 1977 over a conflicting one made decades later, every day of the week.

A few observations from the data as presented in that table -

Is it not very odd that Seiko were seemingly able to reduce the power consumption by 43% going from the 484xA to 484xB movements, but make no improvement at all going from the 482xA and 4883A, to the 482xB and 4883B? And then, despite this, all of the B movements are designed to use the smaller battery?

Surely this would mean a significant decrease in battery life for watches using the 482xB and 4883B movements over their -A movement counterparts? Yet the table states a battery life of 2 years for all of the movements.

The table states that the 48-series Grand Quartz are accurate to +/-15 seconds per month (both A and B movements), whereas the 48-series King Quartz A movements are accurate to +/- 10 seconds per month, and then the 48-series King Quartz B movements are accurate to +/- 15 seconds per month.

This is completely contrary to all marketing material throughout the time that Grand and King Quartz watches were being produced. 48-series Grand Quartz are promoted as being accurate to +/- 5 seconds per month, and 48-series King Quartz as being accurate to +/- 10 seconds per month - regardless of whether it is the A or B series movements.

The 4883A Superior movement is states as being accurate to +/- 10 seconds per month.

The 4883B Superior movement is stated as being accurate to +/- 15 seconds per month.

Both are incorrect - the 4883 Superior (both A and B movements) were promoted at the time as being accurate to +/- 1 second per month. 

To stress - I'm not taking issue with you here, you're simply going off the (seemingly trustworthy given its source) data that you had to hand.

My issue is with whichever intern it was that they tasked with drawing up that table, because it is pretty clear when you cross-check with the information that was available at the time the watches were on the market, that nothing in it can be trusted!

Kind regards,

Gerald.

[akable]

Jun 5, 2021 0:58:14 GMT -8 cobrajet25 said:

...and change the model number from -8040 to -8041 sometime in '76?

I am obviously late to this discussion but just making a comment on the terminology used.

The -8040 -8041 are actually the case codes and not the model number.

The model number is specific to an actual watch design and is unique while the movement and case code combination, e.g. 4843-8040, can refer to multiple models.

The different models that all share the same movement and case, can have different case finishes, e.g. stainless steel or gold plate, they can have a bracelet or a strap, and can have different dial colors.

A good example on this can be seen in the 1976 V1 catalog page 7 where two watches are shown. Both have the 4843 calibre and the 8040 case but they are quite different. The QNK824 model (as shown by cobrajet25) has a strap, cap gold case and a champagne dial. The other model is the QNK040, it has a bracelet and stainless steel case with a white dial.